on a daily basis. i have seen car accidents. i drive, and i need drive. and nine times out of 10, i park on masonic. whether across the street or a block away or five blocks away. i park on masonic because there is no other place to park. is there no paid parking. the buildings in my area aren't single family homes. they are apartment buildings. which means even more cars in the area. the thought of having my neighbor's parking taken away scares me to death. and i think if you were faced with the same prospect you would be concerned too. so i think while changes do need to be made. and i wanted to say the

statistics about parking. i think those are way off. and had i known of the other meetings going on, i would be at those too to voice my concern as well. i think that parking needs to be factored into this. and a lot of reports i have been reading, a lot of articles i have seen. seem to gloss over the fact that parking will be gone. and not just one spot [bell] not just five, but hundreds of parking spots. thank you. >> thank you. next. >> andrew narvag -- no, catherine orgman. followed by catherine ross. are they here? >> i think catherine orgman

left, i am catherine ross. i am a long time resident, i live directly across the panhandle from masonic. i ride a bike. i have nevered own a car. anyone who is complaining about parking spaces, has been using the parking space i have not used in the 25 years in san francisco. i don't take up a parking spot. i don't have a driver's license, they can thank me after the hearing. but now masonic is my north/south route. and other streets go straight hill and dead end. if there was another option for bikes, we would take it. believe me. and the conditions on masonic are completely unacceptable, not just me but the people that have been killed there that i am

totally heart broken about. and to me that takes such precedence over parking, and the fact that people are complaining about the loss of parking spaces, and in the light of the slaughter on this street. it's shameful of that priority. this is a great plan, i am extremely impressed what they have come up with. and it's no loss of muni speed. as experienced as i am in a bicyclist in this city. i have been extremely close to being killed on masonic. to the point that the person in the back has their heart in their throat. don't want to do that and please

approve this plan. >> ana marie pierce. >> good morning, i am ana marie pierce. i would like to thank those who prepared this plan. we fully support it. we took a survey of our members and most of them supported it. and i want to add that mrs. myers who was here until a little while ago and represented the university of san francisco was here to also support the plan. >> thank you. >> marian casey. >> hi. i am marian casey. i live at -- i own a condo at 227 masonic. i myself do not have a car. but the fact that there would be no parking on masonic is really

just impossible for me to comprehend. because of service vehicles and all of the friends coming on the weekends. because the particular area that i live is across from the blood center. and across from the park, from the school on the other side. and there is no side street parking. because the university of san francisco is right behind us. just ewing terrace is small and we all have old houses. and not room for the cars and there are two flats at every unit. i went to all three meetings. in fact i am the pitcher of the first meeting. not like i wasn't involved. but i really have difficulty. and i have to say this is not, i didn't know about this meeting. if i didn't google something

from the bike coalition. i wouldn't have known this existed today. i have been inquiring. i think a lot of safety issues can be addressed. there is still not a pedestrian count-down light on masonic and church. the biggest street. i don't think there should be left-turn lanes at all. excuse me, no right on red. because the drivers don't look for pedestrians. and they are busy looking for turn. and i am a pedestrian and the limit is pointless. and because of the commuter lanes are going to be eliminated. why not eliminate them now. and see what happens. [bell] as of now the parking is too big of an issue. >> thank you. next speaker. >> elizabeth stamp.

>> good afternoon, i am elizabeth stamp, the execute you have director of walk san francisco. i am here to speak in support on behalf of walk sf for this project. as you know masonic is a big, wide, fast, dangerous street. and earlier a speaker mentioned going to trader joes and not wanting to be killed on the way there. and to bike on the sidewalk, and to provide space for people to bike on the street and get people off the sidewalk. and have a ripple effect to reduce the speeds on corridor, because someone was killed walking back to her car with her groceries recently from trader joes. it's a real tragedy and totally preventable. and one shortcoming on this plan

is that it doesn't go as far as it could. it doesn't go to trader joes. we ask that there are some improvements made at oak and masonic. which is one block south of where the project extends to. feld and masonic is a big place for bicyclists to cross, because of the light. but oak and masonic is a place for pedestrians to cross. it was a two-lane left turn from oak to masonic. it's now one lane, which is much better but there still could be a lot of improvements. this will improve conditions for everyone, walking and driving and biking. and it will make clear that masonic is not a speed way. people live along masonic, it's

a neighborhood street and should be a place for people to walk in safety and comfort. >> stephanie tucker. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon commissioners. i am stephanie tucker, we are here to express our strong support for this project. we have heard from district 5 residents their strong support for this. two deaths are too many along masonic avenue. and we thank everyone who has done their due diligence in outreaching to the community. and problem solving any potential issues that could come up as a result of removing parking. and i just want to say, our office is highly empathetic to our residents who are losing parking. especially those who have disabilities that prohibit them

from being able to walk or take the bus. but in the end, we feel that this project is the right project for district 5. and it's the right thing to do for the citizens of san francisco. for five years we have been pushing to have this project realized. we are very grateful to see that we are taking this very important step today. and i -- i strongly support you approving it and moving forward. thank you. >> thank you. >> peter lauterborn. >> good afternoon. >> afternoon. thank you board for hearing this item. i am peter lautenborn, i am here to voice strong support for this project. it's a little to the east of our district. but it is used heavily by our residents. it's the way that the people connect to the new routes in the park you put in.

and connect people to the paved streets and northern bike routes and people coming from the north to the wiggle. we are really supportive of this. and we are more supportive of the words that supervisor marr introduced a hearing request of the impact there. and that was supported by supervisor alagy and supervisor feld. and we will go to the t.a. to find ways to fund this project. thank you and we appreciate and hope this gets approved. >> next speaker. >> michael helquist. >> good afternoon, i am michael helquist, i live at golden gate and central. one block east of masonic. i lived in this location in a home i own for the last 15 years.

i use muni. i walk and sometimes drive and bike. i try to avoid traveling on masonic by any means. because i know it's not safe. i helped organize two community vigils for people hit and killed by motorists driving dangerously on masonic. neither the pedestrian nor the bicyclist were crossing or riding against the law or against the light or doing any unlawful. i want to thank you for considering the change on this corridor. there are two additional points. i was involved in the plan and development for the last two years. first and foremost the strongest feeling is that this is about safety for all road user. it was never just a bike plan. this is what neighbors and community organizations have stressed for several years now. i am a member of the north of

panhandle association, and i can't remember how many articles there were published. not only published in our newsletter but that gets hand delivered to 3500 residents in the neighborhood. our side of masonic. and second i want to commend mta for recommending the most comprehensive outreach undertaken. it was almost like someone would have to decide not to hear about this to avoid the mailings and post cards and e-mails and door-to-door contact. and i want to mention about the north panhandle neighborhood group. with they took a survey of the residents, 80% of the people supported. >> elias sumari. the last person that submitted a

card. >> i am elias and i bike on masonic going to trader joes and places north of presidio. it's crazy and scary and i try to avoid it. but most of the time i try to avoid it. sometimes i ride on the sidewalk because i am afraid. someone said she is scared to death to lose the parking. and i am scared to ride on it, anyone with a parking as a fundamental right, shouldn't be living in san francisco. i am excited to see the changes after all of these years. i guess that's it. >> thank you. >> any other member of the public wishes to address the board that has not spoken?

>> i am going to close the public hearing. >> aye. >> this passines. >> i want to say i thank you for all of your work on this. i know that you were personally involved with mill's vigil and reaching out to the family. i hope they aware of this. >> a motion and second.

any further discussion? >> first to those who have come down to say they are concerned about parking or driving and all of this. we welcome your voices here. you shouldn't feel shame of voicing your views about what you want for your neighborhood. i hope that is some response to you and comments made. that said i favor this program. i think it will enhance safety. i ha i have voiced my one concern. we need to look at ways to be sure that traffic flows evenly. and there is confusion when the director and i spoke, and the offers. i hope you look at no turn restriction on the northbound masonic at feld. i think that will cause congestion. i want to address that and note that. >> we have a motion and second

to approve the resolution as amended. >> aye. >> ayes have it. thank you. >> item 13, approving proposed policies. >> there are no speakering cards. whereas clause the word proposed has removed from the fifth, sixth, seventh language whereas clauses. inserting language for policy. the whereas clause would read,

the management of policies that affirm existing parking management practices and continues as is. and deleting the word "proposed" out of sixth whereas. and on the eighth whereas and the language inserting: as a separate policy proposal. and the language is the same. mta will consider reform to better reflect the needs. and then with read to the result clause. deleting the words "approved the proposed" and inserting the affirmed parking policy for approving for parking management. >> deal with the amendment first. does a member of the board. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> so we have that.

on the item itself, members want to discuss. we have a written report. >> we had this at policy and governance and we had a discussion about it. and i believe we were all pretty much on the same page in improving it. >> i was surprised, did i read this correctly, no other city in the country has done this. putting these together, as far as we know? >> as far as we know, these are policies and practices that have been in place for years that reflect the engineering judgment of our transportation professionals. they have not for us been documented and codified in one place. and the clarifying amendment to the resolution was to clear up confusion among the public. whether we were implementing something new than documenting

the existing practices. and any changes that we make in traffic will always come to you. we are starting practices, and anything that we contemplate there, we will take through an exhaustive public process. this item is articulating and documenting existing policy. >> we have not done that and this is fine. members of the public didn't understand this. there were a number of things. >> i wanted to commend the staff for putting together such a great report. i thought it was fascinating. learned a lot. the parking program was brilliant and helped me to inform this decision.

>> okay, we have -- >> not specific to this item, but i expected this to be in the policy breakdown. we hear a lot from the public on the meters on holidays. and i realize that's a separate item, and one that i shouldn't bring up at this hour of day. but i would like to find out more about that at another board meeting. and since we put that in place, and how it's been working out. and has it been effective and promote what we want, parking turn over and what is it costing us per what we are getting from

it. that's separate but related. >> you are right, we get a lot of comments about fourth of july and labor day. >> part of that is selfish, i want to have an intelligent answer to respond. >> anything else? so the amendment first. we have a motion and second on the amendment, all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> ayes have it. and on the amended resolution. >> motion. >> second. >> all in favor? >> ayes. >> ayes have it. and no closed legal session. >> no closed legal session. >> that's a shame. >> thank you, mrs. morley. thank you everyone. we are adjourning in memory of mr. baker. >> thank you. [gavel]

good morning and welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the city operations and neighborhood service. my name is shawn elsbernd,

chair. i'm joined by the vice chair, supervisor carmen chu, our clerk is derek evans. notice at the begining of the meeting a few minutes before 11:00 we will have to take a recess and we will be back hopefully no later than 11:30, so we will try to get as much done before that time as we can. just warning to all, and i apologize for that. mr. clerk, item one. >>the clerk: item one, ordinance amending code by repealing 12d.a.22 and amending 14b.18 to repeal provisions extending expiration of chapter 12d in event of injunction, versus san francisco and amending cross-reference to 421249 and 14b. >> christine is here to give us a brief intro on

this. >> thank you, supervisors. this is a cleanup ordinance that has no effect on the city's current contracting practices. the contracting ordinance from 2003 was based on 2003 hearings and federal law makes clear our contracting ordinances that give race and gender preferences must be based on recent hearings. the law -- that chapter, 12d.a has been joined since 2004. the board in 2008 extended the expiration of the ordinance based on the injunction. four years later the ordinance still has been staid, injection not lifted. it is not very clear that the board would need new fact-finding to continue the ordinance in effect. this simply cleans thaup and clears the way for future fact-finding. >> thank you very much. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, closed. questions? move this forward with recommendation? >> so moved.

>> we will make that the order without objection. mr. clerk, item 12. >> resolution determining the premises for transfer liquor license to -- 398-12th for the double rainbow. * >> mr. chair, supervisors, my name is mark rennie. i represent double rainbow llc. come on guys. who have made application for determination under 23958 of the business code that the issuance of a type 48 liquor license to 398-12th street would serve public convenience and necessity of the city and county of san francisco. i would like to put in the record yesterday they had a little fundraiser across

the street. here is approximately 500 original signatures that were added to the cause yesterday. i have previously put out -- if i could have the overhead for just a second. this is as of yesterday. at the folsom fair. * on saturday there was a new paint job on the eagle. and it is a unique san francisco institution. we were here while you guys were on vacation. it was quite a hearing. and there have been -- mike leon and alex montiel were the original purchasers of 100% interest in double rainbow llc. this is a corporation. there is basically no bank account, a secretary of state and abc filing.

it was the intention of property owner to preserve the liquor license, not run into non-conforming use for letting it go too long. these -- as soon as this license transfers, mike and alex are going to go down to abc with me, get finger-printed, put in a new llc questionnaire and take over 100% ownership. they do have a lease. they are in positive sofasing these premises. it is approximately 4,500 square feet, half of it outside, which is what makes this place so beloved. it is a beautiful old garden. it was for 30 years. first the eagle, then the eagle tavern. during the 80s this particular location hosted well over 500 fundraisers for h.i.v. and a.i.d.s. and raised millions of dollars. this is much beloved in the

gay, lesbian, bisexual and trance gender community. they are happy there are new owners that want to respect the old eagle and bring it back. so this project includes a number of ada upgrades, ada bathrooms, passive travel. there would be soundproofing added. it's always been a good neighbor, wants to continue as a good neighbor so there will be added sound-proofing. 30 jobs, tax revenues. i think this is a great project. we request this be sent to the full board with recommendation that it be granted. >> thank you, mark. supervisor wiener, you here on this? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm here to express my full support for the transfer. while i do not want to in any way speak for my colleagues, i know that supervisor